Did I say something funny? by Capn Madd Matt on Flickr
Chris and I presented a workshop at Web Directions North this week we had originally titled, “The Enterprise and Government in the 2.0 Era: What’s Next?”
Boring, eh? Well, we thought so. So, we sat down a couple of weeks ago to restructure the information we had into what we thought was a much more compelling way to look at things. We came up with this:
Part 1: citizen happiness defined
oh and this…
Part 2: the building blocks of citizen happiness
And, although I think the workshop went well and we exchanged loads of great ideas, the question was still asked, “What does government or enterprise have to do with Citizen Happiness?”
I have always taken it for granted that it should be my right, not my privilege to be happy. If I am a good person and a good community member, even moreso. But others disagree. Why? Well, it’s mainly because we have a different view on what happiness means.
So, what does happiness mean? Some thing it means that you get what you want, you have all of the material things you desire and you have ultimate freedom. But I don’t think that is happiness. There are multiple studies that prove that people who ostensibly have everything their hearts desire aren’t any more happy than those who don’t and who have to work hard to get a fraction of that.
The clarity came for me when I found a press release from the American Psychological Association on what actually makes people happy. And what did they find?
Attaining popularity or influence and money or luxury is not what makes people the happiest and is at the bottom of the list of psychological needs, according to a new study. Topping the list of needs that appear to bring happiness are autonomy (feeling that your activities are self-chosen and self-endorsed), competence (feeling that you are effective in your activities), relatedness (feeling a sense of closeness with others) and self-esteem.
These, to me, all seem like reasonable things to be happy about. Of course, self-esteem is that one piece you can’t control (it’s your set-point…what you are born with. It can be worked on with drugs, therapy and meditation), but the rest of them are very easily controllable. And there are many companies that I could look at today that I would say fit the profile of delivering the tools of happiness: autonomy, competence and relatedness. Companies that give you tools of autonomy, like Wordpress for raising your voice. Companies that give you the feeling of competence through their really intuitive interfaces that gradually get more challenging, helping you learn. Companies that raise your relatedness by connecting you with others in significant ways.
In fact, I feel that these also line up beautifully to the core values I attribute to what we call Web 2.0:
- Openness
- Collaboration
- Community
Openness, I map to autonomy and competence because more clear information leads to people feeling like they can make better decisions…Collaboration, I map to competence and relatedness because you feel more assured on a team…and Community, I map to relatedness, but also autonomy, because it brings us closer together while breeding independence. In a big way, all of the best parts of the world around me are what causes alot of happiness. So much happiness, in fact, that people that ‘get it’ start to really reach that self-actualization part of Maslow’s Hierarchy of Needs, which is the ultimate in human growth can lead to double happiness, or euphoria.
It isn’t perfect, but I know it has certainly helped me and hundreds around me reach deep into our potential.
So, why is it that government or business can’t see their roles in this? Sure, it isn’t anyone’s job to ‘deliver’ happiness to you…but why not play a role in enabling it? There are two ways in which you can help people with becoming happier:
- Create tools or deliver services that help people proactively pursue happiness
- Create tools or deliver services that reduce the barriers to happiness
And what are those barriers? Fear, confusion, loneliness, feeling disempowered and out of control of one’s life and the basic struggle for survival (not being able to fulfill basic needs like hunger, security and sociality).
To me it seems pretty obvious that it would be simple to build a business around helping people achieve autonomy, a feeling of competence and relatedness. In fact, every web company that has been successful thusfar has their business build solidly on one or all of these. And I believe that as people discover that these things are within their reach, they will gravitate more and more towards companies that offer tools to helping them achieve happiness.
And governments? Sure, they don’t have any real competition…or do they? According to The Flight of the Creative Class: The New Global Competition for Talent, there is a competition. Some countries call it the ‘brain drain’ (sounds awful). People are going to where they will be more happy, and it isn’t necessarily for money. I believe it is for where they can build the most Social Capital and reach their ultimate self-actualization. The US protects its borders for a good reason. It’s written right into the Declaration of Independence that “life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness” are inalienable rights to man. That’s pretty powerful and though a good look around the US will show that those rights are, in fact, alienated all of the time, it is still part of the promise of the American Dream AND, I should add, within the grasp of just enough people to keep that dream alive.
But what would happen if we committed to it? What would happen if happiness was within the grasp of everyone and business and government delivered those tools instead of the tools of misery and insecurity? Wouldn’t it be nice to have ample access to autonomy, competence and relatedness for everyone…not to mention the tools to get us climbing up Maslow’s pyramid? I’d like to see this and what could come of it. I’d like to see more businesses built on a model of happiness.
10 Comments
Tara, I think this is tremendous. I would take it a step farther by pointing out that companies can and should do this *internally* as well, so that they don’t face their own brain drain. We’ve all seen companies that prospered despite many challenges because they treated their people well and freed them up to do great work — and most of us have seen the reverse in operation, too.
The APA model to which you point also gives *lots* of food for thought for both managers and for regular folks as they relate to clients, colleagues, and friends: how can we help those around us experience greater autonomy, competence, relatedness, and self-esteem? That’s a great guiding question to live by. (In fact, right now I’m thinking about how I can implement it better as a blogger. Wheels turning…)
One nagging issue: you say that self-esteem is a biological given. Reflexively I disagree with you, though I realize this is based on my own mindset rather than scientific evidence on my part. So, can you point me to sources for your view that “self-esteem is that one piece you can’t control”? Because I certainly tend to believe it’s *well* under our control.
Hmmm, I like it but it’s too much food for thought to swallow right now. I’ll try and post a response.
Quickly…
I do think that self-esteem is under your control, or at the very least your influence.
And I also feel that web 2.0 needs an ‘autonomy’ or independence separate from community. Part of micro blogging and blogging is the sense that ‘I did this’.
Let it simmer with me for a bit, but I love the direction.
You have given us an image of “the ideal” and something to give me a shot of happiness as I start my day.
Government could serve to lift us out of isolation, serve us with a buffer against capitalism i.e. we present you with a sustainable level of food and shelter when your employer has laid you off, and it could offer greater incentive and motivation to develop culture (which feeds the soul).
There is so much it _could_ do. Frederick Douglas would tell you to go out and, “Agitate, agitate, agitate!”
I saw your “Fare thee well January” twitter, and now this. I’d like to join you on that tune.
In the last 30 days, I was laid off from my job, and quit a regionally successfully band headed for the studio and a summer full of festivals. And when I look back at the months preceding these changes, there was a drastic lack of the qualities the Psych Assoc. used to spell happiness. As I read your post, I had this feeling, “Oh, so that’s what it was. That’s why I was so damn unhappy.”
Thank you.
I still like Charlie Brown’s definition of happiness, too.
Maybe the reasons government and businesses “can’t see their role in this” is because it is perceived as too difficult to achieve. A sort of “where to start?” attitude. And, perhaps the people within these organizations feel too disconnected from citizens and customers to really know what their roles are in enabling said happiness.
So like Tim Walker says, this type of exercise does need to start internally to foster a work environment that is exciting and fulfilling but also to help employees recognize their roles in making it happen for citizens and customers.
It’s something my company is now working on and so far, the exercise has been incredibly insightful.
Some very good stuff in those slides, and as anyone who has consulted to a variety of companies can testify, “company happiness” has a major impact on life, health…and productivity.
The area that does worry me a bit is going too gung-ho / dewey eyed into “political happiness 2.0″ - on the one hand one risks the Benthamite quicksands of the “greater good” - which historically has had tragic consequences - and on the other the “cult of me” which - if emerging happiness research is correct - actually leads to a large amount of un-happiness.
One of your slides showed Jonathan Haidt’s “the happiness hypothesis” which I think is one of the better books on happiness as it is based on the “hard” psychological research going on rather than opinion (which fields like this are prone to) - some of which (eg freedom and choice is good, but too much is not) is quite counter-intuitive and does go against some of the current “feel good” philosophies.
There is clearly a happy medium that needs to be negotiated
I discussed similar ideas with following the high-school shooting in Finland. Modern welfare states already provide food & shelter, i.e. base of Maslow’s hierarchy. If we’d move to broaden our view of happiness than it’d be quite clear that it shouldn’t just be well-fare for all, but well-being as well. Also see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gross_national_happiness
Great stuff Tara - you are spot on. I think the term happiness is very relevant to the meaning of life and higher order motivations of individuals. We maybe don’t appreciate it enough. We certainly don’t consider it in our rational organisational models as there is little room for such emotional things (aren’t these taken care of by rational economic man?.
Thank you for your analysis - very interesting.
I love this blog! It really hits home for us at Jiibe.com. I am not trying to make a pitch for what we do, but our mission is, “helping people make better decisions for a happier life.” We help people discover if their company is doing the things that can make them happy. We are creating a marketplace for people to find better work cultures. One of our favorite companies is Quicken Loans. Many people are afraid to answer the Jiibe questions because they fear repercussions from their employer, not at Quicken Loans they freely told their people to Jiibe in their blog. No company is perfect, but if they give their employees this kind of autonomy, you can bet the other principles of happiness follow close behind - http://www.jiibe.com/companies/quicken-loans and here is the blog that give their people a voice - http://www.whatsthediff.com/2008/02/my-jiibe.html#more.
very insightful, and slick slides as well
4 Trackbacks
[...] Social metrics is something I’m diving into right now and I’m enjoying the swim so far. Lots to learn (for everyone) but crucial stuff with broad applications. Everything from what is a friend worth to ‘does social networks make us happier?” [...]
[...] afraid to relate the world of business to the world of the personal. I loved her recent blog entry Happiness as Core to Your Business Model because it again effortlessly aligns the goals of individuals with the goals of business. She [...]
[...] and contacts we have to help us overcome any situation and/or reach true self-actualization. I can tie it very tightly to the idea of Happiness as well (but that’s for another [...]
[...] …the 3 elements of a business model based on delivering happiness. [...]